On Why Google Glass Isn't So Interesting

1) Price - this is an easy barrier to see. $1500 plus say $300 for an attached Android device is a lot of money. This will hurt consumer adoption. The Xoom failed at $800 (this was just WiFi option) and Logitech Google TV failed at $300. Google needs to get this one right.

2) Not many developers translates to not many apps. Without apps, it's not an interesting consumer device. The price (1) is going to severely reduce the size of the developer community for Google Glass. I remember on the first day the Xoom was released, I was waiting for Best Buy to open. Another Android dev was waiting there as well and told me he was going to buy the Xoom, test his app and then return the Xoom. I only shelled out the money because I had a contract to develop an app on this specific device so the cost made sense. Most devs can't afford or justify a $1500 price point (particularly for an untested market).

Logitech Google TV is another good example of not having enough apps. Google gave away 10,000 units but only to web developers (I still don't know what Google was thinking). Android developers weren't in the picture so there were very few applications available for it. When I bought it, I was disappointed with everything but the YouTube app (this single app is awesome by the way). Google TV is a boring platform for both the developer and the consumer.

3) It's a web app, you can't create native apps. A lot (well maybe not a lot) of web developers are jumping with joy, but for developers who are traditionally in the mobile or embedded space, this is uninteresting. The only published way to develop an app is through a web service or site.

Let's take a look at what we can do. Google Glass has an API referred to as the Mirror API.

* Timeline - REST API for deleting, viewing and creating timelines
* Subscriptions (subscribe to timeline or locations)
* Locations (attached to a timeline)
* Contacts (People you know, phone number, other types of contact methods).

So you pretty much get the idea. Just about everything is tied to a timeline. You can add to it, scroll through it and be notified about it. There are some cool sounding applications like creating a Google Hangout, with live streaming video. It's all very social. But as a non-web developer, what can I really do with this device, besides jumping out of an airplane with it of course?

One idea I had was to use the glasses as sensor for another attached device. I could hack it and maybe build out an accessory (using say an Arduino Mega). The problem is that Google Glass is not that impressive as a set of external sensors. It has a Camera, Audio, and Bluetooth/WiFi. It doesn't contain a GPS chip, relying on an attached Android device for location. Since we can't develop native apps, hooking up additional external sensors to Google Glass is also not doable.

I'm not saying Google won't get it right before it releases the consumer version, but as it stands, it's a boring developer platform for all but a web developer. If Google opens up to allowing developers to write native apps (maybe adding a more impressive set of sensors that could be accessed through ADK), it would garner more development interest from us non-web folks. If Google Glass is going to become something more than Google+ on steroids, it will have to open up to native apps. ADK support will also be required to expand the limited sensors on the Glasses.

4) It's not an open platform. This goes beyond just building native apps or being able to tweak the platform itself because even the web apps are going to be tightly controlled. To further lock things down, Google adds in it's terms:

You may not publish or distribute API Clients outside of the official Google-hosted Google Mirror API Client distribution channel, unless otherwise approved in writing by Google.

Google wants developers to innovate under a lot of constraints...

5) Uncertain business model with the Glass platform. According to Mirror API terms and conditions:

No Fees. You may not charge end users any fees or collect any payments in order to download or access your API Client, or in connection with virtual goods or functionality of your API Client

No Ads. You may not serve or include any advertisements in your API Client

So I can't make money off anything using the Mirror API. I've already mentioned (3) that the Mirror API is currently the only way to build apps for Google Glass. This seems to be case closed, 'No Business Model' but in the 'Glass Platform Developer Policies':

Don't collect, store, or share sensitive personal information such as credit card, bank account, driver's license, or Social Security numbers, except as necessary to collect payment.

This seems to suggest there may be a way to make money in the future, just not through the Mirror API Google provides, which is currently the only way to develop for the platform.

To further muddy the waters, Google has setup the Glass Collective to fund entrepenuers in this area. I'm confused on how to start and fund a company when there is no model for making money. I'm sure KPCB will love such a business plan. The fastest way to fail a business is to believe that after building it, you will figure it out how to make money.

So to sum up, Google Glass is an expensive device that's going to have a limited number of web apps on a closed platform with limited sensors. Oh and I can't make money from my work. Now I do believe that there is a future potential for Google Glass, but this first generation is not exciting enough to be a serious developer platform.